A 62-year-old supermarket worker was fired after failing a secret shopper test at a store in Siena, Italy. What could have been just another day at work turned into the moment that changed his professional life.
The situation, which at first glance seems simple, ended up shaking a career built over more than a decade and launched a debate about what is asked of workers when they are being evaluated without knowing it. The case gained even more weight because the employee was a union delegate, a detail that placed the company’s decision under greater scrutiny.
According to Executive Digest, a website specializing in economics and companies, the evaluation took place on October 27th. To test the worker’s attention, people were hired to simulate shopping and hide small items between beer boxes in the cart. It was a discreet procedure, designed to go unnoticed.
The worker, focused on the normal movement of the box, did not identify the objects. Minutes later, he was informed that he had made a serious mistake and that his position no longer existed for him. According to the same publication, the decision was immediate and no alternative was presented.
He remembers that he had already been subjected to a similar test months before and that, at that time, everything went smoothly. This time, you feel that the objects were placed in a more subtle way, almost impossible to detect.
The impact was not limited to the workplace. “I’ve been at home ever since. This affected my family a lot, especially because my wife has a disability”, he said, revealing the personal dimension of a decision taken in just a few minutes, but which had a profound impact on his daily life.
Union criticizes lack of clear rules
Filcams CGIL, the union following the case, says that the company has used the secret shopper method in an unclear way.
The union structure emphasizes that there are no defined rules or known criteria, and that management unilaterally decides when and who is evaluated, without any prior notice or transparent procedure.
According to the union, this practice has served to alienate workers with older contracts, considered more expensive for the company.
The union secretary added that there is no internal regulation that governs these assessments, nor that defines the disciplinary weight of detected failures. A meeting has already been scheduled with management to demand clarification and try to reverse the dismissal.
If there is no agreement, the union does not rule out moving towards more drastic forms of protest, including store occupations or even a regional strike. Tension between workers and management remains high, with no signs of abating.
The management of the supermarket chain was contacted to comment on the case, but refused to comment on what happened.
Could this happen in Portugal?
The situation in Siena raises an inevitable question: could something similar happen in Portugal? According to , the use of secret shoppers is not, in itself, illegal in the Portuguese labor context, but depends on clear internal rules and a disciplinary process that respects the labor code.
When union activity is at stake, companies’ room for maneuver is even more limited, since the law guarantees reinforced protection for union delegates. Without a transparent framework and well-defined procedures, assessments of this type can easily conflict with workers’ fundamental rights, making their implementation problematic.
Also read:
